Previous Section Back to Table of Contents Lords Hansard Home Page

8 A member of the Committee shall so organise his private affairs so that they do not conflict with his public duty."

The noble Lord said: My Lords, the amendment provides the new schedule to which I referred in our debate on Amendment No. 30. The amendment has been tabled to indicate to those outside the House who have been following the development of the prior scrutiny debate the nature of the further work that is being carried out in the detail of the proposal.

18 Apr 2002 : Column 1197

The new schedule would enshrine in primary legislation matters relating to: the tenure of office of committee members; the procedure of the DESC; the issue of access to information by the DESC; definitions of sensitive information; stage one and stage two arrangements for the notification of licence applications; measures for the avoidance of delay in the treatment of applications; and conflict of interest issues.

The amendment might be of assistance to the Government at a later stage, in particular with regard to the work that we have carried out in that area. In completing my contributions to this evening's debate, perhaps I may say to my noble friend that I detect a slight shifting of the ground in his responses. I do not mean that in any critical way, but in the sense that we have set out to respond to each of the very important and detailed objections that Ministers have made to the whole principle of prior scrutiny. I note that some new thoughts have been given to this matter and some new objections have been raised. I can assure my noble friend that we shall set out to respond to those over the coming days.

My noble friend referred to the question of transparency under the present quadripartite arrangements. But, of course, he will know that the Quadripartite Committee's objections are essentially

18 Apr 2002 : Column 1198

that the post-scrutiny arrangements and not the prior scrutiny arrangements are being looked at. That brings us to the core of the committee's objection.

He also referred to the whole question of later legislation, although I believe that I heard him say that a route may be available which does not necessarily go by way of legislation. The problem with later legislation is that which arises in relation to the hedges Bill: there is never a slot. We must take whatever opportunities we can find. This is a golden opportunity to bring about the changes in the law which so many people in the United Kingdom want. I beg to move.

Lord Sainsbury of Turville: My Lords, I do not believe that I can add to the comments that I made in relation to Amendment No. 30.

Lord Campbell-Savours: My Lords, I accept that response. On that basis, I beg leave to withdraw the amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Land at Palace Avenue, Kensington (Acquisition of Freehold) Bill

Brought from the Commons, read a first time and referred to the Examiners.

        House adjourned at twenty-seven minutes past ten o'clock.

Next Section Back to Table of Contents Lords Hansard Home Page